Anti-Subjugator

2005-08-28

Reject Iraq's Constitution

Iraq's new constitution can be found here. Here are my objections. I would vote against this constitution myself.

"Recognizing God's right upon us"

To an atheist, this may as well say that the Loch Ness monster has a right upon us.

"Article (2): 1st - Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation:"

This is religious discrimination in the constitution.

"(a) No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam."

What exactly are the undisputed rules of Islam? That Muslims aren't allowed to make friends with the Christians and Jews? So Iraq isn't allowed to form a Free Trade Agreement with a predominantly-Christian country such as USA?

"2nd - This constitution guarantees the Islamic identity of the majority of the Iraqi people"

The constitution somehow manages to prevent mass conversion to Hinduism, does it?

"Article (3): Iraq is a multiethnic, multi-religious and multi-sect country. It is part of the Islamic world and its Arab people are part of the Arab nation."

Starts well, but the last bit is horribly racist. It should read "Iraqi people of any race are humans and do not have a brotherhood with any other nation on the basis of race. Instead, brotherhood will be based on ideology, specifically all Iraqis are proud members of the free world". Also it should call on other members of the free world to help ensure that Iraq remains part of the free world forever.

"especially the Saddamist Baath Party in Iraq"

Don't honour this tyrant any more than necessary. Ensure Saddam's name doesn't appear in the constitution. Preferably delete the reference to the Ba'ath Party as well. The rest of the paragraph does enough to dissuage Saddam's old party. No need to name it explicitly.

"Article (8): Iraq shall abide by the principles of good neighbourliness and by not intervening in the internal affairs of the other countries"

Imagine if the west hadn't intervened in the internal affairs of Iraq! Scrap this article and replace it with "Iraqis, as victims of unimaginable human rights abuses, will actively seek to ensure the human rights of others, regardless of nationality.

"parents have the right to respect and care from their children, especially in times of want, disability or old age."

Say what? Children are free independent people. They do not have any obligation to their parents who they may happen to hate. This contradicts freedom of association.

"3rd - Forced labour, slavery and the commerce in slaves is forbidden, as is the trading in women or children or the sex trade."

This is not quite clear. Are you banning prostitution? Banning dirty movies? You're infringing on people's rights if you are. Learn from Australia.

"Article (36): The state guarantees, as long as it does not violate public order and morality:1st - the freedom of expressing opinion by all means."

You mean I'm not allowed to express an opinion on something if it is "immoral"? Does that mean I can't say "I enjoy watching toads fuck each other"? What about "Gerbils make the best sex partners"?.

“I swear by God almighty to carry out"

I swear by the Loch Ness Monster again.

I didn't read through the way elections are carried out, but I advocate using Australia's preferential voting system such that votes cast for minority parties are not wasted - the next preference takes effect instead when the minor party is eliminated.

On the plus side, at least the constitution doesn't explicitly take away my right to blaspheme, e.g. "Mohammed was a Satanic pedophile".

2005-08-25

Australian Values

Dear Sir,I read that finally someone is going to take a good hard look at what Muslims are being taught, with a view to ensuring that they are integrated properly into Australian society. I have spent a lot of effort analyzing exactly what the differences are between Australian values and say Saudi Arabian values. I have outlined them below. The main problem is that people from these other countries are often racist and religious bigots. They assume (incorrectly) that we are also racist/religious bigots, not realising that modern Christians are taught that humans of all religions are equal and that God loves us all. Muslims are stuck in the 7th century where only Muslims go to heaven and everyone else (the sub-humans) go to eternal Hellfire. It is not surprising that we have problems with that sort of attitude! Anyway, without further ado, here are the main Australian values that need to be taught:

I am AGAINST racism. I am AGAINST sexism. I am AGAINST religious discrimination. I am AGAINST nationalism and national bigotry. I am AGAINST non-humanist behaviour. I am AGAINST dogma. I am AGAINST subjugation. I do not dwell on the past. I have empathy for strangers. I protect strangers. I fiercely protect my mates. I will be best mates with anyone in the world, regardless of race, religion, sex or nationality. I RESPECT INDIVIDUALS who VOLUNTARILY donate to COMPLETE STRANGERS (ie different race, different sex, different religion, different nationality) using their OWN HARD-EARNED MONEY. I will FIGHT using my BRAIN subjugation of ANY HUMAN.

Most of Australia's idiosyncrasies can be found in the following movie:http://www.ezydvd.com.au/item.zml/3671I recommend that this be compulsory viewing material and children should be required to analyze it.

2005-08-20

To Palestine with Raised Eyebrows

Open Letter to Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Territories

Dear Sir,I noticed that you are overjoyed that Jews are being ethnically cleansed from Gaza. Jews are just human beings. You shouldn't be happy that some humans are moving from one place to another. It's the same as some dogs moving from one place to another, or for trees to move from one place to another. It doesn't make any difference. This is not the solution to the problem. All it does is highlight the fact that you are a racist/religious bigot wanting to ethnically cleanse people. It doesn't achieve anything. It doesn't bring a higher standard of living to Palestinians. It doesn't bring anything at all.

If you actually want to solve the real problem, I have some suggestions that you might find useful.

First of all, if I were you, I'd be more concerned about the human rights and living standard of the Palestinians, instead of dreaming of getting back to 1967 borders, or 1948 borders, or 1938 borders. The human rights and living standards of Palestinians are under the control of you, not Israel.

Israel's military presence in Palestine is similar to the US's military presence in Afghanistan, Iraq, Germany, Japan, Australia. The US forces do not set the LAWS that the PEOPLE live under. And the Israeli forces don't set the LAWS of the Palestinian people.

The next thing you need to know is that it is not possible to win militarily. The Palestinians think that Vietnam defeated America, so they should be able to do the same. That's NOT TRUE. When the US left in 1972, there were two countries, North Vietnam and South Vietnam. The South Vietnamese were stronger. But between 1972 and 1975, the North Vietnamese got new tanks. And it was those NVA ***tanks*** that defeated SVA ***tanks*** which won the war. America was not even there (unfortunately). If the Americans had provided air cover, the NVA tanks would have been destroyed. Unfortunately many people have learnt the wrong lesson from Vietnam.

If I were you, I'd be trying to create two European-style provinces. One in Gaza Strip, one in West Bank. European-style means full respect for human rights, and all people are equal regardless of race, religion or sex. That means Jews are equal too. And it also means that if a Muslim wants to change religion to become a Jew, there should be NO DISCRIMINATION against him. At the moment, Palestinians are so intolerant that they would kill someone for changing religion. This simply creates a HORRIBLE COUNTRY for the Palestinians to live in.

I would stop all the TV broadcasts that say how bad Jews are, and instead I would teach children that all people are equal, regardless of race, religion, sex or nationality.

I would ban Hamas and all other terrorist groups. I would not allow them to run for elections.

I would also stop Fatah from running for elections. Fatah shouldbe in charge of a TEMPORARY ADMINISTRATION (similar to how Paul Bremer was temporarily in charge in Iraq). And I would say that there must be new parties created (similar to the 200+ parties in Iraq) and that the parties must all be SECULAR and HUMANIST (ie not related to any religion or sect, and must all treat Jews as equals). This is similar to how Germany bans the Nazi party, and Belgium has similar restrictions.

I would declare that I am in favour of democracy in the Middle East and support the new Iraqi government. I would send a small number of troops (e.g. 10) to Iraq to help with security. This would be a BIG HELP. I would say publicly that I want Palestine to become allied with the FREE WORLD instead of racist Arab DICTATORS.

I would then ask for HELP from a country such as Finland, to help oversee the entire Palestinian government. To make sure there is no corruption. To make sure that the Palestinian government conforms to the HIGHEST STANDARDS OF CIVILIZATION. Similar to how Yugoslavia/Serbia has RADICALLY CHANGED. Besides Finland, you could also ask Australia, South Korea or Taiwan to help with setting up your government and security services so that they are up to FIRST WORLD STANDARDS.

I would tell the Palestinians that terrorism is DISGUSTING and that EVERYONE should help Israel, ie everyone should become a "collaborator". Instead of MURDERING collaborators, you should be HELPING the "collaborators".

I would also suggest that Abbas publicly converts to the Mu'tazilah sect of Islam. I have tried to create a modern version of Mu'tazilah. Here it is:

1. do unto others as you would have others do unto you.2. fight subjugation.3. empathy for strangers.

AFTER Gaza Strip and West Bank have been converted into LIBERAL democracies, you can then have negotiations with Israel to find out if you want to have a union with them, or whether you would like to have a separate state, or whether you would like to have Gaza become a province of Egypt and the West Bank to be a province of Jordan.

The Palestinian people are too radicalized at the moment, and they shouldn't be voting, because they support terrorists. Instead, there should be a temporary administration that will oversee the transition of Palestine into a first world country. Tell Finland etc that you want them to stay until such time as they think that the Palestinian people are ready for democracy, ie no longer radicalized and hating Jews. You can't teach children to hate. It destroys your soul. The Israelis are not teaching their children to hate Arabs or Palestinians. No first world country teaches children to hate. Teaching children to hate is a form of child abuse. If you don't stop the child abuse soon, the US will probably overthrow your regime, after it has finished with the rest of the world.

You can easily defeat the Palestinian terrorists. Israel or Finland etc will help you defeat them if you need help. This is a straightforward technical problem to solve. There are no excuses.

2005-08-19

Sudan

Yesterday something very sad happened. I was chatting to someone who was a refugee from Sudan, now living in Egypt. He had been tortured by the Sudanese government and his fiance had died shortly after being gang-raped by the Sudanese government. What a fucked up world we live in. And it is so easy for the western military to solve this problem. I told him that I would do everything I could to topple the Sudanese government, but that my highest priority was Iran, because Iran is a success story waiting to happen while Sudan is a basket-case waiting to happen. Sudan will probably fracture into 3 countries, all of them basket-cases. And probably all 3 countries will require a Paul Bremer-style recolonization if human rights are to be protected. I don't trust democracy to work there.

But it is so sad that we can't even get people to agree that unleashing the military on Iraq was a wonderful thing, and that it should be repeated in Iran. And some people say we have no right to attack another country without provocation. Well, two answers to that. First is that it's not attacking a country, it's liberating the country by attacking the JAILERS. Secondly, if you commit human rights abuses against ANY human it is a provocation because they are MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS.

Good grief. This world is so fucked up. The worst thing about it is that I know how to fix all the problems. The ideology that needs to be exported is what was documented in message 666 on 2004-09-11. But what I don't know is how to convince westerners to do this. They seem to be suffering from a dogma that "war is bad" instead of acknowledging "holocaust is often worse than a quick war". And I don't know how to make them change their minds. There must be SOMETHING I can say to make them change their minds, surely?

2005-08-18

Live 8

There was a good article on the Live 8 debacle. I would like to add my 2c to it. This is a big problem with today's "heroes" like Bob Geldoff. He doesn't have the balls to come out and say "look, the problem is that these African dictators aren't running a non-corrupt capitalist society like we do". Instead, he attacks the easiest group to attack - the rich people in the G8. Nevermind that those loans weren't even being serviced. He'll attack the easy, innocent prey instead of having the balls to say what needs to be said.

I'll add some of my own difficult questions for Sir Bob to answer. Let's start with this one - when these debts are cancelled, does that mean that Africa will never again be allowed to borrow money - not even to build a hydroelectric power station? If not, what is going to prevent Africa from coming right back to where it is now? Next question I have is - will an equal amount of funding be given to the responsible African countries that didn't borrow money foolishly? If not, it is grossly unfair to punish the responsible and reward the irresponsible. What sort of lesson does this give to future African governments?

Ah, I'll say what I really want to say. Geldoff - stick it up your fokkin arse - you're part of the problem, not the solution. Step aside and let those of us who really care about the suffering of Africa take over.

2005-08-16

Iraqi Constitution

According to what the ITM brothers reported, there are suggestion forms for Iraqis to influence the new constitution. If I'm not too late, here is what I suggest everyone fills in on the forms:

Everyone has the right to live under a RATIONAL, HUMANIST and NON-SUBJUGATING government, with full respect of human rights, including but not limited to freedom of speech. At the moment, there are a whole lot of proposed laws that say "you have this freedom so long as it doesn't contradict Islam/traditions". This is a big problem. That really means you don't have the right at all. The human right of freedom of speech enables people to make statements that aren't popular or normal. You should not be STOPPING ideas, you should instead be COUNTERING them.

Now, if the government is to be rational, humanist and non-subjugating, then that means that the parties vying for power must also be the same. In the west there is a thing called "separation of church and state". That is a misnomer. It should really be called RATIONAL GOVERNMENT. This means that dogmas such as Communism or Islam should not be allowed into government. This is how western societies advanced - by keeping the Christian dogma (the bible) out of government.

For the parties to be humanist, all parties that are of the form "Kurdish xyz Party" need to be banned. If you allow people to vote according to their race or sect, you end up with the hopeless situation that exists in Northern Ireland. In Northern Ireland, people vote for their religious sect, and it means that the losers appear to be second-class citizens. People should not be divided by their race or sect. They should be divided over how best to run the country - economic policy, that sort of thing.

The next thing you need to do is specifically renounce the Treaty of Westphalia and anything in the UN Charter that says that human rights are an internal sovereign issue. You should make a point of saying that you want the NATO countries to provide guarantees that in the event of a military coup, they will act to restore Iraq's democracy. Such a guarantee will ensure that no-one in Iraq's military will attempt such a coup in the first place. In addition, you should request a NATO presence in the Kurdish areas for as long as the Kurds feel necessary.

I hope it's not too late for you to get one of these forms filled in and affect the final outcome. If you don't get the above incorporated, then I suggest you veto the new constitution.

2005-08-14

Caliphate

I am trying to restore the Caliphate. The Caliph is the Muslim equivalent of the Pope. Note that this is not a tyrannical regime I'm trying to implement - what a horrible thought! As with the Pope and the Catholic church, you are completely free to ignore their thoughts whether it be on abortion or gay marriage. Real power remains in the hands of the governments and the people who elect them. But in my opinion, the Papacy has TOTALLY discredited itself, the moment it stood behind Saddam and his holocaust which included institutionalized rape, instead of allying with the forces of freedom. Hence, for the first time there will be an "NGO" that isn't aligned with the left-wing moonbats who support state-slavery, or aligned with the feminazis who didn't give a damn how many Iraqi women were raped by Saddam.

I'm seeking a Caliph in each country as a starting point. To become a Caliph you must:

1. Recognize me as God.2. Join the Mu'tazilah religion, ie acknowledge you are a Muslim and follow the 3 pillars documented at www.mutazilah.org/holybook.htm (there's no need to follow all the derived stuff that constitutes the bulk of the document).3. You must reside and be a national of the country you wish to be Caliph of.

Let us together create a kick-arse religious movement that puts the Pope to shame. Please email me if you are interested. Note that the positions of Caliph of Peru and the Philippines have already been filled. You can see the names of existing Caliphs by going to www.mutazilah.org/holybook.htm and choosing "Caliphate". Let's make this happen. It's about time we had a religious organization that isn't afraid to call on the US military to immediately topple human rights abusers. And it'll piss off the morally bankrupt left-wing pro-holocaust anti-war no end. :-)

P.S. I forgot to mention in my last post that I have my freedom of speech back.

2005-08-12

Pulling Rank

Why did I declare myself to be God? Because there seems to be no other choice. My message is not getting out simply by logic alone. I was forced to pull out all stops to bring an end to the human rights abuses as quickly as possible. I believe that if I were widely accepted as God, most of the remaining wars would not need to be fought. So let me state my case. First of all, I want to tell you the model of the universe that I believe is most likely. I believe that this entire universe is a Virtual Reality computer simulation which I chose to run. ie the universe is here for my entertainment. It is probably only a few decades old. All the history and human memory are part of the computer simulation. Since I chose to run this software, I am God. But there is an administrator who I call the Environment Controller who intervenes as necessary. I think the Environment Controller is another part of me.

I grew up with authoritarian parents, who basically demanded that I goose-step to their dictates or face corporal punishment. If I were playing with a ball, they would say "stop playing with the ball and get in the car", expecting me to be as obedient as the family dog. I instead always bounced the ball one more time, refusing to be treated like a dog, and I would subsequently get beaten. At the time I didn't have the words to describe this. But after 37 years, I finally came up with the definition of who I was - I FIGHT SUBJUGATION. My parents were trying to subjugate me. This is part of human nature. Although I hated this at the time, and swore I'd never speak to them again as soon as I turned 18 and got human rights, I don't actually blame my parents anymore. Why? Because I believe that I DELIBERATELY chose these people as parents because I DELIBERATELY wanted to turn myself into an anti-subjugator, so that I would fight for the human rights of others who are languishing under a subjugating government, as the Eastern Europeans were.

During my childhood, I was constantly being picked on by other kids. I couldn't understand why they were doing this, while still calling themselves Christian. There was something seriously wrong with the way the bible was being taught if it kept producing monsters intent on mindless violence. I used to endure a lot of suffering at the hands of others before I resorted to violence myself in order to fix the problem. I didn't have the words for it at the time, but these people were naturally trying to subjugate me. No-one had ever taught them "fight subjugation". I wish I had the words "stop trying to subjugate me" and that they had been taught the meaning of that from the bible etc.

Although I had been raised as a Christian, when I went to Fiji at the age of about 12, I became an atheist. I saw no evidence of a God, especially one looking after me. Again, I believe this was deliberate. I wanted myself to get the feeling of being all alone with no-one looking out for my rights. I instead started looking out for other people's rights. I wished I could use the western armies to liberate Eastern Europe so that we could find out if they REALLY wanted communism or not. Basically I wanted to free the hostages. I wrote to the USSR asking what they were doing in Afghanistan, and received a whole lot of propaganda back.

I was watching my watch as I turned 18. Counting the seconds to when I would get my human rights. I jumped for joy when I got them. I wanted everyone in the world to have that same feeling of freedom. But how could I get it implemented? The oppressed people were still being held captive by the USSR, protected by nukes. In the meantime I set about trying to protect myself economically, so that I could be in a strong position to protect others. As soon as I figured out the best way to protect others! Australians were already protected - we have social security so that no-one fears starving to death. So the focus of my attention was the rest of the world. I realised that the maximum benefit would come from toppling dictators. Because then the resources of that country would stop being squandered on a dictator and instead be distributed amongst the people.

When China had the Tianamen Square massacre, for the first (and only) time in my life, there was a protest that I wanted to attend - against the Chinese embassy in Sydney. Then the unthinkable happened - the USSR collapsed. What joy that was! And for the first time in my life I found a charity that I actually wanted to donate to. The Red Cross had a Romanian appeal after the Romanians threw off their dictatorship. I figured if the Romanians were willing to put their life on the line for freedom, that I could at least help pay for the bandages for the wounded. Then Desert Storm came. I had hoped that the Russians would have joined us and establish the New World Order that Bush talked about. Unfortunately, there was something in the Russian psyche that was preventing them from joining us.

While I was waiting for Russia to calm down, I was busy tackling a different problem - Microsoft's monopoly. I led by example, writing public domain code so that commercial enterprises could pick it up and polish it off, as described here. I even created my own operating system, PDOS. Unfortunately, most people preferred to implement the GNU Virus Licence which is an attempt at something akin to communism - restricting the ability of businesses to pick up the code and fix it in a manner that allows them to make a profit.

Meanwhile, back on the security front, I cheered as NATO liberated Kosovo from communist dictatorship, and then as Serbia itself threw off its shackles. Basically I was overjoyed whenever the western military went into action. It makes the world a better place - ending state-slavery. I assumed that most Australians felt the same way, as the vibes I received from my workmates during Desert Storm were along the lines of "Up and at 'em boys". There was bipartisan support and the polls showed something like 90% in favour, even for our own troops to be used. There was only one dissenting voice, from an independent who represented my electorate (and I voted for him!). I rang him up and complained that he wasn't representing our electorate and I never voted for him again.

It wasn't until Operation Iraqi Freedom that I saw something was wrong with Australia. We didn't get bipartisan support for the action, and the left-wing were genuinely up in arms about it. I devoted my life to trying to figure out "what went wrong". Why weren't 90% of Australians behind ending state-slavery in Iraq? To answer this, required me to find out what my underlying ideology was that was different from theirs. I teased this out in the Iraqi blogs, as I was able to question the whole world on where they stood on the use of calculated violence to end holocausts. I started off doing this surreptiously, because I wanted to see what the "free market" would bring up in the comments section. I probed the Iraqi bloggers by email so as to not disturb the comments. The commenters were good, but they were all missing the point. The main point being that under Saddam there was INSITUTIONALIZED RAPE. Opposition to the liberation meant the unconscionable fact of supporting the status quo - ie supporting the indefinite continuation of the rape of women instead of going to their rescue. I finally entered the public arena on 2004-03-23, on "The Mesopotomian". As an Australian atheist, I was able to take pressure off the poor American Christians who kept on getting accused of spreading "Christian values" by force of arms. But as an atheist, I could say that it wasn't Christian values being exported, it was something else. Something I shared in common with both American Christians and Iraqi Muslims. But could I isolate that common ideology? My final answer, after 37 years of searching, happened to come out in a message on the same Iraqi blog (even though this was not the blog that I frequented the most), numbered 666, and the date was 2004-09-11, ie the 3-year anniversary of 9/11. I was still an atheist at the time, and I was proud that it was an atheist that had managed to figure out the core ideology. By the way, this was the second time I had found somewhere worthwhile to donate money - the Iraqi blogs. Bringing a pro-liberation message to the world. And supporting the blogger-created "Iraq Pro-Democracy Party".

Shortly after I posted that crucially-important message, the unthinkable happened. God (or who I now call "The Environment Controller"), contacted me, shattering my entire worldview in an instant. There were 4 separate things that happened during this contact (the contact lasted about 2 days):

1. My brain was changed to introduce a feeling of enormous love - the feeling that God was protecting me.

2. I had a feeling that any decisions I made were being made safely, ie I wasn't alone in making them.

3. Long chains of logic were given to me, explaining various things. E.g. one chain walked me back through my life, explaining how the things I did wrong were due to faulty logic or the influence of my genes. Another logic chain suggested that we were already living in Heaven, and I was actually an aborted baby.

4. The Environment Controller (EC) demonstrated that he could physically control my body.

I was overwhelmed by this, especially because one of the logic chains was that there was a butterfly effect and that everything I was doing wrong was causing others to suffer. I went to the hospital to be sedated. Instead, I was incarcerated into a sort of mental ward. I was allowed out after a couple of weeks. One of the things the EC had told me was that if I didn't think the bible was clear or accurate, I should write my own. So I did. I then started trying to "sell" my new religion. My new religion was actually a sect of Islam, because I was mainly trying to save the Muslims from their current nihilistic path. Ali Fadhil, one of the Iraqi bloggers, had told me about this sect.

Then in July 2005, I was unable to concentrate at work because the only thing coursing through my mind was freedom. That is when I decided to announce that I was God, to try to shake things up. I was having trouble sleeping again. I went to see the doctor again, and they decided to incarcerate me again! I was sitting at the doctor's, and then realised that instead of sitting there waiting to be incarcerated, I should make a run for it and try to seek help via my blog. I ran to my car, and the police had just arrived and chased me. I managed to get into my car and lock the doors before they stopped me, and I took off in a hurry and managed to escape. But they caught me along the road. I had no choice but to surrender and unlock the door. They dragged me from my car, pushed me down onto the road, and then seemed to put all their weight on my head, scratching my face on the road. But after the handcuffs were on, they took the weight off my head. I was sent to the same mental ward again. It was to be another 2 weeks before I was finally able to be free again, and even then it was on condition that I not mention that I am God.

So, what is the evidence that I am God? Well firstly, you can judge by my life. I have spent my whole life trying to bring freedom to people, or when I was unable to do that, then I was trying to improve humanity by leveraging into the potential of public domain source code. Was there ever a time in my life when I wasn't trying to fix this world instead of waiting for the next one? I don't think so. As far as I can tell I have taken an optimal path through life, caring about other people's human rights. The poor Iraqi women who were being raped by their own government probably thought that God was ignoring their plight. That no-one cared about them. Well, it's not true. I was caring about them the whole time. I spend ALL my time working on geostrategy - trying to find a way to break through and rescue the oppressed. In fact I was unaware that others weren't doing the exact same thing. Too many people were surprised that I had wanted to free the oppressed even as a child. But in this universe I am only armed with my brain and my heart. You need to look hard if you want to see who I am.

Secondly, you can see my crucial message 666 on 9/11. It's too much of a coincidence that my whole life of searching should come to a climax on that date with that message number. Then there's the unverifiable stuff. The most important of the unverifiable stuff is the fact that I don't have "love of God" switched on in my brain. Why? Because I'm not meant to. Because I am God. I'm not meant to feel love of God, I'm meant to be showing others that I love them and that I am looking out for them.

Another thing I'd like to draw attention to is the "judgement" everyone was waiting for. You can find that here. Although in addition to that I would like to say that the US's actions since 9/11 have been exemplary, especially when the US soldiers kneeled down and then retreated when faced with an angry mob of UNARMED Iraqis in Najaf. It made me cry.

And another thing. If I were able to definitely prove that I was God, you would lose your freedom. To be totally free you have to believe that there is either no god, or that God doesn't sit in judgement. That way you have to make up your own rules about what is right and what is wrong. Which is exactly what I want. I don't want to be a dictator. However, while not proof, there is some EVIDENCE that may whet your appetite.

One of the revelations that was given to me was "If you don't like the bible - write your own!". This is what I have done with Mu'tazilah. This is another reason why I think that the Environment Controller has passed the reins to me. It is me, not the EC, that is the "real" god.

UPDATE: More evidence. What do you expect my highest priority would be at this point in time? Ending institutionalized rape in Iran now that Mr Bush et al have ended institutionalized rape in Iraq? Bingo.

UPDATE 2: Note that it is only a theory that I am God. Since I am not omniscient or omnipresent myself, I may just be a prophet - the second coming of Jesus if you will.

2005-08-11

To Russia with Love

Open Letter to Vladimir Putin, President of Russia

Dear Sir,After the collapse of communism, I fully expected Russia to change sides, and be a pro-western country the same as Eastern Europe and the Baltics. But it didn't happen. I have spent a lot of time analyzing "what went wrong" and I have drawn some conclusions which you might find useful. Especially I have an explanation as to why you aren't being accepted by the western world. First of all, you need to know what western ideology is. Here is roughly the ideology that our western governments are following:

I am AGAINST racism. I am AGAINST sexism. I am AGAINST religious discrimination. I am AGAINST dogma.I am AGAINST nationalism and national bigotry.I am AGAINST non-humanist behaviour.I am AGAINST subjugation. I RESPECT INDIVIDUALS who VOLUNTARILY donate to COMPLETE STRANGERS (ie different race, different sex, different religion) using their OWN HARD-EARNED MONEY.

I will FIGHT using my BRAIN subjugation of ANY HUMAN.

Now look at all the things that Russia is doing that are against this ideology. You cared about the Serbs being bombed in 1999, but didn't care about crimes committed against the Kosovars. This is a sign of racism. It appears that Russia only cares about fellow Slavs. You will not be accepted by the west if you are racist. Another indicator of racism is why you aren't doing anything to help protect Taiwan from communist China. You should be helping Taiwan because of a shared IDEOLOGY of freedom (ie not being subjugated) rather than because of their race.

The next bit of the ideology you are causing conflict with is nationalism. The Russians are far too eager to classify their country as beyond criticism. You will only be accepted by the west if you show that you can be self-critical and learn lessons from your own past bad behaviour. The west doesn't like people who think they are perfect and have done no wrong ever.

Another thing you are doing wrong is that you are not donating to complete strangers. You only care about your own national interests. Why don't you give some money to buy toys for Iraqi children? It doesn't matter how much you give. So long as you are giving something, anything, for NO BENEFIT TO YOURSELF.

But by far the most important factor is that in our eyes you are attempting to SUBJUGATE Georgia and Moldova. You have your troops there against the will of those two countries. This immediately makes you a subjugator. And here is what you need to understand about NATO. NATO is NOT an anti-Russian alliance. The members are not being bullied by USA to join NATO. They are joining of their own free will. How was this accomplished? NATO is a NATURAL alliance of anti-subjugators and non-subjugators, uniting against any potential subjugator. To Russia, it may appear that the forces in Georgia and Moldova are very small. But that's all it takes to give your country the status of "subjugator". You are scaring us. If you want to subjugate others, then what is stopping you from subjugating us too?

If you are genuinely concerned about the human rights of people in Georgia and Moldova, then you should request NATO to go and safeguard the people. You shouldn't do it unilaterally. I am sure that Georgia and Moldova will be willing to have a NATO presence in their countries. What they don't want is Russia subjugating them. Again, this is not anti-Russia. It is anti-subjugator. You can actually request that NATO use ethnic Russians from the Baltic states. It doesn't matter what the race of the peacekeepers are. What matters is that they are not seen as subjugators. This is why the US is always keen to have a coalition. E.g. in Afghanistan, the ISAF has no US soldiers in it. This is deliberate, to avoid the image of the US subjugating Afghanistan. The US wants to show that it is not trying to conquer/subjugate the people of Afghanistan, it merely wants to ensure that no-one else (such as the Taliban) is trying to subjugate the country. The US is an anti-subjugator.

The rule about "fighting subjugation" is something that doesn't just apply between countries, e.g. "USSR subjugated Eastern Europe", it also applies between the government and the people, e.g. "Stalin subjugated the Russian people". In fact, it also applies in a family, e.g. "the husband is subjugating his wife". And the reason we have rapists in the world is because they also have a genetic desire to subjugate others. And what rapists are lacking is EMPATHY FOR STRANGERS. If you start using the extremely important word "subjugate" in your discussions (plus the concept of dividing the world into subjugators, non-subjugators and anti-subjugators), then you will understand why NATO forces appear to be inching closer and closer to Russia's borders (which is understandably causing concern to you).

It is my expectation that after you cease being a subjugator (ie after you pull your troops out of Georgia and Moldova), you will suddenly become a non-subjugator (at least of other countries), and you can start having a meaningful relationship with NATO. The NATO-Russia Council can be converted into a NATO-Russia alliance, ie a mutual defence pact that any attack on Russia is an attack on NATO and vice-versa. I really hope this can happen soon. It would be terrible to lose this opportunity because of a cultural misunderstanding. I look forward to the day when Australia and Russia are formal allies again. ie Australia gets entry into NATO and NATO is allied with Russia.

UPDATE: One thing I forgot to mention. In the Anglophone countries we don't remember history way back to when Noah was a boy. We don't look back much further than WWII. We judge people by their current behaviour not their past bad behaviour. No-one cares that Japan, Germany and Russia used to be enemies. The past is the past. We live in the present. That's why we are able to form alliances with such a broad group of people. That's why NATO exists. Historical amnesia is a great asset.

UPDATE 2: A feature of NATO is that you can split any NATO country in half, and both halves will return to NATO of their own free will. No-one needs to be coerced. Anti-subjugators and non-subjugators ally together naturally.

UPDATE 3: Another part of our ideology is that we respect people who are UNSELFISH. And another part is that we judge people by their IDEOLOGY not their military strength. People like the Baltics have a kick-arse ideology of "never again" to "neutrality". This is highly respected.

UPDATE 4: Another way of expressing what the west respects is TRUE ALTRUISM (thanks to Chris Tune for the phrase).

UPDATE 5: Also, it is in our blood to protect the weak. That is why we try to defend Taiwan, why we wanted to embrace the Baltics, and why we refuse to sell out Georgia and Moldova. We wish you felt the same way. Protecting lovely democracies like Taiwan against a nasty communist dictatorship. Defending weak anti-subjugators from strong subjugators is noble and honorable.

2005-08-10

Stop Hassling the Oppressed

There are some people who insist that people need to help themselves, and that if the Iranians/Syrians/etc want to be free, they should speak out and stand up for themselves and/or overthrow the government themselves. This attitude is absolutely disgraceful. Do you remember the carnage of WWI when ARMED men tried charging machine guns? What do you think happens 90 years on with more modern weaponry and an unarmed population? Exactly the same thing. 100,000 died in Iraq in 1991 trying to overthrow their government. If they had actually been successful, 100,000 would be a reasonable price to end their holocaust. But they were unsuccessful. So they died for nothing at all. The Iranians tried a revolution in 1999. They had more people than in the 1979 revolution. And as happened in Iraq, they were mowed down by helicopters.

It's very easy for westerners with freedom of speech protected by the security forces to lecture others about speaking up. Very easy and very cruel. These westerners should be speaking up on behalf of the oppressed themselves, and directly taking on the vitriol of the anti-war left at home. It's only words, not bullets. Stand up and be counted. And that includes the various church groups, including the Pope, that took the easy way out and stood with the left-wing instead of standing up for an end to human suffering. The left-wing is totally morally bankrupt. They only care about stealing as much from the rich as possible. But the church leaders didn't need to join them. Another example of western cowardice is how many people are willing to stand up and say "far too many blacks are racist"? Whites have to put up with endless criticism about how racist they supposedly are. When are we going to see a white stand up and say "um, is anyone actually teaching blacks to not be racist?". Too many blacks are suffering because of their own racism. They're in a "permanent victimhood" mode, tilting at windmills instead of trying to better themselves. This self-destructiveness is encouraged by the left, in an attempt to make capitalist societies look bad. Republicans are painted as universal racists. This subterfuge against Republicans is the true racism. Anything's fair for "the cause". Dr Rice is the subject of ridicule because of the colour of her skin. The audacity of a black joining the Republicans instead of goose-stepping in line with the rest of the Democrats.

And then look what happened in Iraq shortly after liberation. There was a large demonstration in favour of liberation. When the left-wing are finally defeated, and history is written honestly, these demonstrations will go down in history as a watershed in human freedom. The first pro-US demonstrations in the Middle East ever. The first time we could see that the Iraqi people didn't just goose-step to whatever Saddam dictated. Except for a brief mention on Fox News, these remarkable demonstrations were completely ignored by the media. I know it is very difficult to believe your own eyes sometimes. I'm afraid we already live in an Orwellian world. The left-wing controls the media and they have skewed things so far that Saddam was some sort of benevolent leader while Bush is Hitler reincarnated. And we're suffering from disbelief in ourselves. If the media didn't show it, maybe it's not so important after all? You need to really really try. We've still got freedom of speech and freedom of thought. You have to trust that this step forward in freedom is a milestone in world freedom. Instead of asking more people like these brave Iraqis to make themselves into targets so that they can be totally ignored by the western media, we need to instead be the ones to come to grips with the enemy within. I don't exactly know how to do this, but promoting Fox News would seem like a good start. When the left-wing says that Fox is biassed, point out that they were the only ones to show the pro-US demos in Iraq. What demos? Exactly.

Did you know that at the time of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Australian polls were split on support for the war? Do you think the US media made any effort to interview some pro-war Australians to try to find out why Australians were polling differently to Europeans? Nope. Intriguing information such as that didn't fit in with the "the world is against aggression against poor innocent Saddam" theme. It's no wonder that the oppressed are so leery of supporting the West. It is an unsafe environment. These people are too weak to stand on their own. They are up against a truly sadistic enemy, and the western media is supporting their enemy. They should keep a low profile. I certainly would if I were in their shoes. I recently asked a pro-freedom Lebanese woman to start a blog. She refused, citing an anti-Syrian Lebanese journalist who had recently been killed. The solution is clear and obvious - those of us fortunate enough to live in an environment with freedom of speech have an obligation to speak up for those who are less fortunate than ourselves.

2005-08-07

Help

I know exactly what I'm trying to achieve. I'm trying to get 90% of Europe, Australia and USA to agree that ending the Iraqi holocaust was the best thing to have happened since the collapse of the Soviet Union. And that we should support the next liberation because of human rights issues, regardless of which country Bush chooses next (Iran is my preferred choice, but I'll settle for whatever Bush thinks is strategic). But I don't know how to achieve this goal. Does anyone have any suggestions? This is the defining point in history as to whether we liberate the rest of the world or not. I've laid out the entire argument already. I'm not aware of anything that is missing. But it's not happening. I thought appealing to religious credentials might help, but it doesn't seem to have done so (although I haven't laid all them out yet). I've out-argued the left-wing loonies who tried to challenge my argument based on human rights. What's left? In this universe, the only thing I am armed with is my brain.

2005-08-01

Chinese Challenge

Open letter to Hu Jintao, President of the People's Republic of China.

Dear Sir,After a lifetime of searching for the underlying reasons of conflict and alliances, I have isolated the crucial elements that define the Anglophone governments. You can use this information in your diplomatic battle with them. If nothing else, in warfare, it is essential to know your enemy, so I'll let you in on all the "secrets".

Here is "average" Anglophone ideology in a nutshell:I am AGAINST racism. I am AGAINST sexism. I am AGAINST religious discrimination. I am AGAINST dogma.I am AGAINST nationalism and national bigotry.I am AGAINST non-humanist behaviour.I am AGAINST subjugation. I RESPECT INDIVIDUALS who VOLUNTARILY donate to COMPLETE STRANGERS (ie different race, different sex, different religion) using their OWN HARD-EARNED MONEY.

I will FIGHT using my BRAIN subjugation of ANY HUMAN.

I have spent much time talking to different people all around the world, e.g. trying to understand why the Russians aren't NATURALLY wanting to protect the Taiwanese. I had expected that after they became democratic, they would naturally help other democratic countries. But they didn't. The reason for this is that they are racist. I had incorrectly assumed that Russians were just like us, ie not racist. Because this is what we are taught in school, you see. We are taught that all people are equal regardless of race/religion/sex/etc etc, and it is SOCIALLY UNACCEPTABLE to be a racist. But our left-wing media is constantly accusing white Christians of being racist and religious bigots. So if you watch news from our countries, you would presumably think that it's true, that we're racists. Nope. We GENUINELY care about the Taiwanese, because they are FELLOW HUMANS who want to remain FREE. And the outrage over the Tianamen Square massacre was genuine too. They were FELLOW HUMANS who wanted to be free. We don't care what race/religion/sex/nationality they are. They're all HUMANS. THAT is what we are taught, and THAT is part of our psyche.

When chatting via the internet with one of your nationals, she made a comment that made me realise something. The comment was after the Olympic Games and she said "look how powerful we are". It was then that it occurred to me that she, and indeed, your whole country, is trying to gain acceptance and respect from America etc. And she/you think that by being strong, you will get the respect/acceptance that you are currently not receiving. That is a huge cultural misunderstanding. We don't RESPECT power, we FEAR power. When we see power, we go and build more and more weapons, and we create stronger and stronger alliances. If you see my list of things above, you can see what we respect. What we respect is CHARITY. Social standing in the west is based on who contributes the most to help the poor. And just saying "I'm poor, I'm donating to myself" doesn't work. China is a poor country. But China can still afford to make a small donation to others. E.g. China could have donated $10,000 to help the Iraqi people. Buy some toys for the Iraqi children. And some of the more affluent Chinese individuals could have done so too (as American individuals did). You are probably thinking "why should I help the Iraqi people - how is that going to benefit me?". But that's the WHOLE POINT. You have to SHOW that you're willing to donate to COMPLETE STRANGERS (different race, different religion, different country) with NO BENEFIT to yourself. If you don't do this, and e.g. only care about other Chinese race/nationality, we will assume that you are racist/nationalist/religious bigots. And if you are any of these things, then you get NO RESPECT. The only thing you can achieve is FEAR.

After Iraq was liberated, a series of "blogs" appeared. Most of the people donating towards internet expenses were Americans. I donated too. But I couldn't help notice that the people most interested in helping the Iraqi people, with their own money, were Americans. In short, the Americans WON the competition of who was the most charitable. Australia was beaten. Australia was also beaten when it came to military contribution and reconstruction aid. We lost. We were humbled by the Americans. Australia's contribution was certainly great, and a lot better than a selfish (that's how it appears to us) nation such as China. Australia will go down in history as a nation that made a wonderful contribution. But it will also be written that the Americans did the most. It was not always like this. Australia contributed more than America in the first half of World War I and World War II. Australia won! Australia was selflessly helping other members of the free world, while Americans were hiding under their beds, and not caring about the suffering of others. But since 1941, America has changed. They've been the winners every single year. Doing the most to protect the free world. Doing the most to help others. Unselfishly. It is because they help with NO STRINGS ATTACHED, that they get respect from me and others like me. And especially other Anglophones, because Anglophones instinctively know the "secret rules" of the game. They don't have the words to describe the game, because they don't know what it is. It's just a feeling. And they also don't know that other people don't know what the rules are. They assume that everyone else has the same culture. So when they see other countries not donating anywhere near as much as they are, they assume (rightly or wrongly) that the other countries are selfish and uncaring. NO RESPECT.

And then there's another aspect. When we see you pointing missiles at a PEACEFUL FREE place like Taiwan, you invoke FEAR in us again. It looks to us like you are trying to SUBJUGATE the Taiwanese. And we HATE SUBJUGATORS. And by not having a democracy, it also appears to us that you are trying to SUBJUGATE the Chinese. And if you are willing to subjugate Chinese people, then we assume that if you were strong enough to do so, you would also subjugate us! So the Anglophones all sense FEAR. And we also feel ANGER that you are subjugating, or trying to subjugate, others. Especially when you're trying to subjugate free people - trying to turn them into slaves. Because Anglophones are not racist, we consider all these free people to be our allies/friends and we NATURALLY want to protect them. I am willing to die to make sure that Taiwan does not face enslavement (subjugation). But this is also another huge cultural misunderstanding. Because from talking to Chinese, my understanding is that the mainland Chinese don't want to subjugate the Taiwanese, they just want to make sure that China doesn't break apart and fall into civil war. So long as you offer protection against subjugation, that's what we're REALLY looking for. We don't really care if Taiwan is an independent country or part of China. What we really care about is that the Taiwanese remain free - ie not subjugated. And the same thing goes for Tibet. They should have the same status as Taiwan or Hong Kong, not necessarily independent.

And this leads to another point. The Anglophones are not using the right word to describe what they want. They keep telling you that they want you to be a democracy. Once again, it's because we FEAR dictators. Democracies are more PREDICTABLE and we can TRUST them. You see, we can tell from opinion polls which way the country is going to vote. So we know if we are suddenly about to get an ideological enemy. But with a dictator, the policy of the ENTIRE COUNTRY can change in 10 seconds!!! By remaining a dictatorship, you are constantly hitting Anglophone SURVIVAL INSTINCT. But we're using the wrong word to describe what we want. We keep saying "democracy" but what we're really after is SAFEGUARDS on POWER. YOU CORRECTLY realise that China is not ready for democracy. Our own democracies did not emerge overnight. They came AFTER the economy was in good shape and there was an EDUCATED middle class. Universal suffrage in China would mean a whole lot of ignorant peasants would vote for some stupid government and China would end up looking like India, Philippines or Venezuela.

Anglophones do not understand that democracy is a means to an end, not the end itself. We equate freedom=democracy. But freedom is more accurately described as NOT SUBJUGATED. It is possible for you to continue to have totalitarian rule but NOT SUBJUGATE the people. In actual fact, China is CLOSE to that already. The Chinese people are free to travel, and free to chat with westerners via the internet, and more-or-less free to practice religion. The level of subjugation is not that high. It is nothing remotely like it was under Mao. But Anglophones more-or-less see all dictators as the same, and all democracies as the same. As soon as we see a transfer from dictatorship to democracy we think "that's it - problem solved!".

But that is yet another misunderstanding. Like I said, democracy is a means to an end, not the end itself. The REAL end, is RATIONAL, HUMANIST NON-SUBJUGATING government. But you won't hear this from the Anglophones, because they don't know these words. They only know "democracy". Let's look at those words in detail. RATIONAL - that means you don't run your country according to some DOGMA, such as communism or Islam. If you do this, you invoke FEAR in us, because it means you are an IDEOLOGICAL ENEMY. If you want to stop SCARING us, then you need to keep telling the Anglophones that you are running a RATIONAL government. But when we see "People's" Republic and "Communist" party and various SLOGANS, we get SCARED. This propaganda scares us. And people who scare us, are our enemies and get no respect/acceptance. We instead just plot ways of DESTROYING our ENEMIES.

Next word is HUMANIST. Do you care about the human rights of your own citizens? Do you care about the human rights of others all over the world? If you don't, then that means you don't care about MY rights either. And if you don't care about ME, then you will NEVER get any respect from me. You will only get contempt from me. If you want to be seen as humanist, you should be standing up for human rights all over the world. THAT is what will get you RESPECT from the Anglophones. And the final word is NON-SUBJUGATING. You need to allow the people to be free to pursue their dreams. And you mostly ALREADY DO THAT.

So, to avoid cultural misunderstandings, here is what you need to do. When the US President says "we would like you to be a democracy, thus allowing the Chinese people to be free", you need to respond as follows:

Thanks US President. I appreciate your concerns, and agree with you on the long-term necessity to become a democratic country like yours. However, please note that your own democracy did not have universal suffrage overnight. Universal suffrage came after the people were more-or-less universally wealthy and educated. Premature democracy causes problems such as occurred in India, where Gandhi implemented ridiculous economic policies, which remain supported by uneducated people, preventing economic reforms to occur. We don't want that in China. What we want in China is to follow the same development path your own country took. We want a government that looks similar to yours, and don't want to jeapordize it at this point in time. We have analyzed your government, and noted that the fundamental policies of your government are that the government be rational, humanist and non-subjugating. We believe these factors to be more important than yet another democratic disaster. We would be more than happy to discuss any non-rational, non-humanist or subjugating aspect of our government's policies, with a view to making them the best in the world. We are also more than happy to provide whatever assurances are required that the Taiwanese people will not be subjugated by us, and that they can remain an autonomous province for eternity. We don't want the Taiwanese people to live in fear of being subjugated either. That was never our intention. We are also happy to make our government more open, so that you can see the government policy is not set by the whim of a single individual or even group of individuals, but is instead set after serious and open debate. We don't want YOU to live in fear of us EITHER, and are more than happy to do whatever is required to allay your concerns, but without jeapordizing our economic reform program. We are also happy to take measures to ensure that the Chinese Armed Forces are loyal to the parliament rather than a single man or small group of men, to prevent abuses of power. We acknowledge that there have been previous such abuses of power, and we are as keen as you to ensure that they are not repeated in the future. We also note your concern about religious freedom. We feel that children should not be indoctrinated with any dogma, be it the Christian bible or Marx's book. We believe that children should be taught the same humanist values that Jesus taught, without invoking the supernatural. With a balanced, scientific, humanist upbringing, adults will be in a strong position to be able to determine how best to use the bible as a resource in their lives. And we also appreciate your concerns about the rights of Chinese citizens to determine the number of children they have themselves. Believe me, we would love that too. But as you know, there is a rational reason as to why we need to reduce the birth rate if we want to not cause future problems. That rational reason necessarily has higher priority than our humanist concerns (which are not in dispute).

Honestly, if you say this, you will be well on your way to being a friend of the US instead of enemy number one. I should also warn you that as soon as Russia stops (appearing to be) subjugating Moldova and Georgia, it will stop hitting the Anglophone nerves as "CAUTION - SUBJUGATOR". And when that happens, the US is likely to formally include Russia in an alliance. An alliance against China, protecting Taiwan! The US is also trying to get others, such as India, to join an alliance. Basically it is Anglophone geostrategy to form as broad an alliance as possible. The Americans are constantly looking for new allies, as you never know what threat is around the corner. And maybe one day it will be necessary to go to war with China over Taiwan. But I personally feel that that would be a huge tragedy. Because the war would be due to cultural misunderstanding from both sides.

Also, I'd like to explain to you how special Taiwan is. Countries like Africa and the Middle East spend their time complaining about how bad the west is, how greedy they are, how they are exploiting the poor, how the west is to blame for everything, whine whine whine, while they sit on their hands and never ever doing any self-criticism. Now compare that to the Taiwanese. Who use their own brains, accept western ideas freely, and work hard to pull themselves up. It has been a huge success (same as South Korea). There is no way that the Anglophones are going to allow a beautiful people like the Taiwanese be enslaved. We would rather take the risk of a nuclear exchange than allow that to happen. Allowing the Taiwanese to be enslaved would DESTROY OUR SOULS. You are wasting your time trying to create a "credible threat" of invasion of Taiwan. We're not going to let them lose. However! There is a condition. If the Taiwanese want us to risk our lives to help them, then they have an obligation towards us as well. That obligation is to not provoke an unnecessary war. And that means - don't declare independence. If they declare independence, they lose protection. If they don't declare independence, they will be protected.

I should tell you one other thing. Anglophones don't care about the fact that you used to be an enemy. Japan used to be an enemy too. We judge people by their CURRENT behaviour, not past bad behaviour. That is why we are able to form ALLIANCES with OLD ENEMIES. That is one of the reasons why we are so strong. Anglophone policy is "the best way to defeat an enemy is to turn him into a friend". That is why we try to be friends with EVERYONE. It's not a trick. We really do hope that if we are nice to others, then they will be nice to us. It doesn't always work, but it is the "best technology" available. Also, you should not be too confused about the Europeans. Although they are saying that the Americans are bad and they hate Americans etc, they don't REALLY think that. If they REALLY thought that, they would be spending money on their armies. They're not. They're just jealous. They're not enemies, they are allies. We are all allies. NATO is growing. Another thing you should know is that guilt is not transferrable. If you blame the current British/white/Anglophones for crimes that happened a century ago, or current Japanese for crimes that happened decades ago, that is RACIST. You won't become friends if you keep teaching children to hate. You need to instead teach children that everyone makes mistakes. Maybe you can teach them about the 60 million Chinese killed by Mao and that "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".

I really hope that China can one day be not just friends, but ALLIES with the Anglophones. That would be WONDERFUL. I hope I have given you a rational path you can follow to achieve that goal. It is obviously up to you, not me, as to whether you WANT to achieve the same goal as me. My hope is that you will follow the path. Us Anglophones can be very good friends you know? And even better ALLIES!